I think you're wrong. McCain is passionate about the military above party lines. The same passion that drives the people on this board that have served. His father was a military man and he was a POW who was tortured. He has spoken out in favor of some initiatives that were on the agenda of this administration because they were favorable to the military.
He also wants to bomb everything with a pulse. He has an agenda, and for him to be for the release of an American pow or hostage or whatever, and then flip flop, is a clear sign of partisan politics. Just like the 50 other republicans who tweeted thoughts and prayers and then took them down when Faux News started lambasting this dude.
The Taliban is not Al Qaeda. The Taliban was not behind 9/11. Their fault was in not giving up bin Ladin when we demanded it, so we took their country away from them. But the AFghnas have been fighting each other for millennia. Sooner or later we must allow them to get back to it. So we get back our troops and let them fight endlessly for generations to come. All that matters to us is that they don't harbor Al Qaeda bases any more. After 13 years of humiliation, I expect that the Taliban will not be inviting the B-52's to return. meanwhile Al Qaeda has moved on from Afghnaistan and we are hitting them in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Sudan. Are yo freaking kidding me? Kharzai has been hostile, corrupt, and an obstructionist from the beginning. We thought we had him out of these but he rigged the last election. He has criticized the US military, restricted them from bombing near civilians, forbid them to fight at night (when we fight best) and generally confounded all of our best attempts to fight the Taliban. Then the son of a bitch actaukklt threatened to go over to the Taliban! Karzai has refused to sign the papers to allow US troops to main to train up the Afghan army, he wants all of us out by December. With allies like Karzai, its no wonder it is easier to work directly with the Taliban. They have also stated that he is innocent until proven guilty . . . you know, the American Justice thing. Moreover, Bergdahl was promoted to Sergeant while in captivity! That can't happen unless his commanding officer thinks he is deserving of it. He may end up being court-martialed, but the Army is rightfully treating him like a soldier until he gets a fair hearing. Actual negotiations didn't start until recently, but "pursuing avenues to negotiate his release" have been going on since his capture. The Taliban knew whatever the Haquanis knew, the two are like the US and Britain. Come on. Who says? Negotiations went on about this. It is a fact that they didn't get KSM or the other top Taliban and Al Qaeda captives. They got low-level guys. If that is who they most wanted then we really won on this. Bottom line . . . all of these guts are either going to be tried and jailed or released soon. At least we got something for these guys./ OK, I was writing Oman when I was thinking Quatar. Nevertheless evevryting that was stated was the absolute truth. Quatar is a major US ally in the Middle East. Undisputedly. "So what" that "they share a border with Saudi Arabia". That is quite meaningless. What is that supposed to suggest? Who cares if they like us? The bases are there because it is in our best interests to have them there. Interests shared by most countries in the region. The important geography here is not that Quatar "shares a border with Saudi Arabia" but the that Qatar sits in the Persian Gulf at a vital strategic position for both sea and air warfare. Not quite. We left the bases in the Phillipines after the eruption of Mt. Penatubo blanketed them with ash. The PI government wanted the bases vacated for political reasons but the locals who depended on the bases for income never liked it. And guess what? The Philippines is now asking for the return of US forces to those bases because of the provocations of China in the South China sea. I know our overseas base situation pretty well. The base in Ecuador was for drug interdiction, but its government has turned pro-Cuban, so we base those operation in Columbia now. And Panama . . . we proved in 1989 that we can defend or even occupy Panama with little effort from other bases. The civilians on Okinawa are tired of them for sure. But the Japanese government is adamant about having US bases in Japan for the long term. They are another important major ally. We have air, naval, and ground forces there in many bases. Again, so what? The size, type and location of our overseas bases evolves through time with the nature of the threat. What are you objecting to here? What is your problem with overseas bases and allies? It ain't a secret to anyone paying attenton. And it is working. American-educated third world leaders are one of our secret weapons. Despite Qatar's strict muslim heritage, they do allow Western business, universities, and military forces there. They cooperate with us diplomatically, economically, and militarily. If the only people we did business with had to be just like us then that would leave us with . . . Canada. Put the anti-muslim bias aside and try to see that America has important interests over there that requires access and allies, even if they disagree with us on many less-important matters. It benefits us immensely.
So he is not due the military justice that he is entitled to? When have we just let the enemy keep US prisoners because peole like you have tried him in your mind and found him unworthy. Now he can stand trial and be punished properly. What is wrong with that? Of course it was. You can't change reality. You just answered your own question. Of course torture of prisoners has been around as long as there have been prisoners of war. But when we practiced it, it was covert. Bush's failed policy was to openly proclaim that torture was legal and justifiable. This will be used against us. Not all of our future wars will be guerrilla wars against terrorists. We will fight conventional wars again. The Geneva Convention IS important. The freaking Nazi's were the worst, genocidal murdering bastards in history, but they treated their American POW's properly for the most part, 100,000 of them. That was important. They could have all been like the SS officer who ordered the massacre at Malmedy. Or they could have treated them like they treated the Russian POW's, 57% of whom died in captivity. They respected the US and Britain for taking care of German prisoners properly by doing the same.
I don't defend Bergdahl. I criticized him at the time and I suspect he deserves a court martial now. I defend getting him back before we leave the country. If he deserted, then lock him up and throw away the key. But he deserves a hearing. And allowing US prisoners to remain in captivity when we leave is not good precedent.
Then have some balls to debate me on it instead of just calling names. V-ball is running rings around you.
Man just think of the outrage had the Jessica Lynch thing or Pat Tillman thing happened on Obama's watch. But it didn't so it's totally cool.
Couple points...the Saudis i.e. Wahabbists were behind 9/11 and it pisses me off that Bush Jr is still friends with the royal family. Yemen is THE hot spot for terrorist training. It is festering and alive. It is growing, not receding. And here's the thing, the Afghans are beat down and they needed something to rally around. These 5 terrorists are doing exactly that. Don't make the mistake of assuming or believing that these guys are or were "harmless" prisoners. There IS a reason for their selection. These are 6er's. The US considers Karzai enough of an ally to satisfy your definition I think. He is subject to the CMJ, not the American justice system. Not exactly. His unit all had to sign non-disclosures during the length of his captivity and because when the Army says you do not say anything about what actually happened that is exactly what they mean. So nothing goes in his records concerning desertion and it is assumed that he was captured and thus eligible for time in service promotion. It is just as much an administrative process so as not to deny him rather than a CO endorsing his service. Why do you believe they are low-level? They are now Mullah Omar's new cabinet. Tried? Jailed? Not a chance. They are living well and as to be expected, Qatar will do nothing to enforce the terms of release. "a Middle East official quoted as saying they'd actually be allowed to move freely -- and even "go back to Afghanistan if they want to....the source, identified as a senior Gulf official, reportedly told Reuters that the five Taliban members would not be treated like prisoners while staying in Qatar, where they were released. Rather, they'd be allowed to "move around freely" in the country and then be allowed to travel outside Qatar after one year....the official, seemingly contrary to Obama's claims, also said U.S. officials would not be involved in monitoring their movements." A major US ally does not fund terrorists directly responsible for attacks against American interests. A major US ally doesn't thumb their royal nose at counter-terrorist activity. A major US ally doesn't consort with Wahabbist Saudi's who teach hatred of America and the West in school houses. Super bases as metro hubs supporting the locals are becoming a thing of the past. I don't object at all. I'm for whatever best supports our needs in those regions. I do however, continue to question why we continue to phack with countries in certain regions when no good can come from it. Cooperate? Lol. They are two-faced, lying scum who sell out regularly to their own advantage. This isn't about Muslims for me. This is about Wahabbism. I have said it repeatedly. Bin laden was a Saudi born Wahabbist. Young boys in Wahabbist schools are being taught to hate, to kill, to terrorize. That is far more effective than a few American educated world leaders. Secret weapons? It's not happening. You think Qatar cooperates? It's been less than 72 hours and they have already failed to enforce what they agreed to in terms of the 5 released Taliban. Sharia law, anti-Christian, terror supporters are not what I consider less important. It's really not even about Bergdahl. The story smells from almost every aspect. The US didn't "win" anything.
The difficulty is in designating him as a prisoner. When one thinks of a POW, it typically applies to someone captured in the line of duty. Bergdahl willingly walked away and for all we know, he had no problems hooking up with the Taliban. They turned him into a tool of sorts but it doesn't necessarily mean he deserves the title of POW or that this was a "prisoner" exchange.
